Hillary Clinton and her allies continue to outspend Donald Trump and his backers over the airwaves by a 15-to-1 margin, according to ad-spending data from SMG Delta.

Team Clinton has spent $57 million on ads so far in the general election -- $25 million coming from the campaign and another $32 million from pro-Clinton Super PACs.

By comparison, Team Trump has aired $3.6 million in ads, with all of the spending from two outside groups, the National Rifle Association ($2.3 million) and Rebuilding America Now ($1.3 million). The Trump campaign has yet to spend a single cent on ads so far in the general election.

Last week, the totals were $45 million for Team Clinton, versus $2.8 million for Team Trump.

Clinton's advantage is even more pronounced in the battlegrounds, where Team Clinton has spent a combined $46.2 million in nine states to Team Trump's $1.2 million. That's nearly a 40-to-1 margin.

New swing-state polls released Wednesday by Quinnipiac University show Trump leading Clinton in Florida and Pennsylvania — and tied in the critical battleground state of Ohio. In three of the states that matter most in November, the surveys point to a race much closer than the national polls, which have Clinton pegged to a significant, mid-single-digit advantage over Trump, suggest.

The race is so close that it's within the margin of error in each of the three states. Trump leads by three points in Florida — the closest state in the 2012 election — 42 percent to 39 percent. In Ohio, the race is tied, 41 percent to 41 percent. And in Pennsylvania — which hasn't voted for a Republican presidential nominee since 1988 — Trump leads, 43 percent to 41 percent.

So Hillary is spending all this money and getting nowhere fast. The media is all-in for her; Roger Ailes has turned Fox News into Anti Trump Central. He's a rookie candidate for office of any kind and she is in her fourth presidential race.

And she is only 4.5 points ahead?

Not double digits?

Behind in Pennsylvania, a must-carry state for Democrats?

Trumpkins saw this before. A fellow named Jeb Bush spent $100 million on ads and staff last year and wound up ending the year 30 points behind Trump. Trump spend zero on TV ads in 2015.

Zero.

So let Never Trumpers gloat.

Our turn comes November 9, the day after the election.

Just as it did on May 3.

--

My new book, "Trump the Press: Don Surber's take on how the pundits blew the 2016 Republican race," is now on sale.

16 comments:

Which goes to show that money isn't everything. I don't watch much on the boob tube, but I wonder what percentage of Trump ads are upbeat versus attacks. Likewise with Hillary. I would think that most Trump ads are upbeat while most of Hillary's are attacks. That's about all she has. Plus she has to draw attention away from her own myriad problems. Can anyone point to a comparison study? - Elric

They've had negative cranked up to 11,000 on Trump for the last eight months. Not just the "usual suspects" of the Democrats and their media/celebutard propaganda wing but almost ALL of the self called "True Conservatives™" in the Republican party and their "conservative media™" propaganda wing.

What has that got them so far? Declining viewership/readership, declining hits on their websites, etc.. Some of them have literally gone psycho like Ace over at Ace of Spades. I was a daily reader of Ace' site along with Instapundit and they were some of my oldest bookmarks. Not anymore. I haven't been to either of their sites in over six months and their bookmarks are deleted.

Hillary's ads are now prompting negative reactions. Not only are they worthless they are harming her. The more exposure she gets the worse she does thus no press conferences. Now even heavily scripted appearances do no good as she bobble-heads her idiocy. And non-stop ads with mush messaging will only remind the public how much dirty money she has behind her. Ad supersaturation is a real problem in marketing. She is damned either way. Excellent. Bob

This race is over. It's over. Hillary is cold product. Big D, would you be willing to accept the position of Press Secretary? I think you're well qualified. But...then you'd have to live down in DC and that would suck. I dunno...give it some thought...

I would like to see a Trump ad of Hillary.... 25 rapid fire head nods and 'arf arf arf!'. 25 more heads nods, 'arf arf arf!" We want this froot loop negotiating foreign policy?!? The big liar is a few bricks short of a load. Trump should keep ridiculing her.

“Intelligent Bernie supporters will NEVER support her because she stands for everything we're fighting against,” Daniel Whitfield, of Discovery Bay, Calif. said. “Just because Bernie has left our movement does not mean it is over.”

Most people who have worked for a long time have had a brash, loudmouthed boss at some point. If he treated you with respect and paid you your worth, you put up with the personality and even admired him begrudgingly for his success and his drive.

The daughter of an acquaintance works for Trump. Says he's a great boss and it's a great place to work.

That's anecdotal, of course, but it is interesting that we haven't seen a flood of ex-employees coming out of the woodwork to slam him and his organization, isn't it? God knows the media is working 24/7 to dig up dirt (did he pick on a classmate in high school like Mitt *allegedly* did?), but so far I haven't seen much of that.

About Me

I live in Poca, West Virginia, with my lovely wife of 40 years, Lou Ann. I am an Army veteran and Cleveland State graduate. I retired after 40 years as a newspaperman. In 2016, I published "Trump the Press," which drew rave reviews at Power Line and Instapundit.